dui was the pull over unlawful?

[fingerscrossed0]

i was driving back from a buddies house around 2 a.m. after going to the bar. i was being followed by another friend of mine who lives on the same street. when turning onto my street from a major highway a cop was coming out with his lights turned off. because his lights were off i didnt know a car was coming out and had to make the turn sharper than i anticipated. he turned around and pulled me over while i was parking at my house. i was 100 percent cooporative and clearly not drunk but nervous. i took the field sobriety test and a breathalizer and blew a .11 bac. he arrested me and let my buddy go who blew a .08 bac. on the way too the station while i was sitting in the cack of the poice car i asked the officer why he pulled me over. he replied "your tires squeeked when you made the turn." the last part was he never read me my miranda rights. is there any way of getting this reduced?
this all happen in rancho cucmanonga CA.
my buddy was following me from his own car.

 

[CdwJava]

i was 100 percent cooporative and clearly not drunk but nervous. i took the field sobriety test and a breathalizer and blew a .11 bac.

These are mutually exclusive statements.

Legally, you WERE impaired at .11. Chances are outstanding that since the officer arrested you, he also formed the opinion you were impaired.

Your attorney can try to take a long shot and get the detention tossed somehow by arguing that the officer's driving caused you to make the unsafe turn that caused him to pull you over, but I'm thinking that's not too likely to work. But, if it's all you got and your attorney is willing to go for it, why not?

he arrested me and let my buddy go who blew a .08 bac.

Your buddy wasn't driving.

the last part was he never read me my miranda rights.

Unlike the impression that most people get from TV, Miranda is not needed in about 9 out of 10 arrests. Miranda is generally required when you have been arrested (or detained with force equivalent to an arrest) AND they are interrogating you. A field contact and the FSTs are typically not subject to Miranda.

is there any way of getting this reduced?

I don't see where you mentioned your state, but your state and county might have diversion programs that you could take through a plea bargain to possibly mitigate some of the damage of a first time conviction. Maybe.

 

[elmuchoprez]

The burden that must be met for an officer to initiate a traffic stop in most jurisdictions is pretty low. Lots of people in the "DUI community" will jump on the illegal stop defense as their first defense because in the grand scheme of things it's the easiest place to shut a case down... but frankly it doesn't work very often at all.

The officer may say he witnessed something suspicious even before you swerved. Even if you feel that your swerve was to avoid him, the cop may see it differently. You should definitely get the police report and see exactly what he says where the determining factors in the stop, but it's an uphill battle. It's especially uphill if it comes down to your word against his, because even though a judge isn't supposed to be considering that fact that you were drunk at that stage of deliberation, they will. So it will be the word of a drunk against a trained officer.

As was already pointed out, your Miranda rights likely have nothing to do with this case. Assuming the stop was valid, the only evidence he really needs against you are the BAC results since you're over the per se limit.

Can you get it reduced? The leeway on this varies by jurisdiction, but most prosecutors aren't offering reductions to non-alcohol offenses. They either want to the judge to rule the stop was invalid (in which case they just can't prosecute and case is cleared from their desk), or they're going to prosecute for an alcohol offense. The problem is that if prosecutors reduce an alcohol related offense, they're opening themselves up to harassment from MADD and other groups, negative media attention, etc... so most offices simply have a no reductions policy when it comes to DUI.

 

[CdwJava]

Most states have options of some kind. Out here the option of a plea to VC 23103.5 (a so-called "wet reckless") is an option to avoid the stigma of a DUI conviction. However, it is a prior for future DUIs and is often not offered if the BAC is much over .10 and almost certainly not at .15 or higher.

 

[HighwayMan]

What state is this?

 

[fingerscrossed0]

These are mutually exclusive statements.

Legally, you WERE impaired at .11. Chances are outstanding that since the officer arrested you, he also formed the opinion you were impaired.

Your attorney can try to take a long shot and get the detention tossed somehow by arguing that the officer's driving caused you to make the unsafe turn that caused him to pull you over, but I'm thinking that's not too likely to work. But, if it's all you got and your attorney is willing to go for it, why not?


Your buddy wasn't driving.


Unlike the impression that most people get from TV, Miranda is not needed in about 9 out of 10 arrests. Miranda is generally required when you have been arrested (or detained with force equivalent to an arrest) AND they are interrogating you. A field contact and the FSTs are typically not subject to Miranda.


I don't see where you mentioned your state, but your state and county might have diversion programs that you could take through a plea bargain to possibly mitigate some of the damage of a first time conviction. Maybe.

revised my statement. please re read

 

[fingerscrossed0]

revised the message. thanks for all the help. please continue to give advise. i am 24 and this is my first offense

 

[fingerscrossed0]

The burden that must be met for an officer to initiate a traffic stop in most jurisdictions is pretty low. Lots of people in the "DUI community" will jump on the illegal stop defense as their first defense because in the grand scheme of things it's the easiest place to shut a case down... but frankly it doesn't work very often at all.

The officer may say he witnessed something suspicious even before you swerved. Even if you feel that your swerve was to avoid him, the cop may see it differently. You should definitely get the police report and see exactly what he says where the determining factors in the stop, but it's an uphill battle. It's especially uphill if it comes down to your word against his, because even though a judge isn't supposed to be considering that fact that you were drunk at that stage of deliberation, they will. So it will be the word of a drunk against a trained officer.
i asked the officer why he pulled me over, its in my revised message

he as already pointed out, your Miranda rights likely have nothing to do with this case. Assuming the stop was valid, the only evidence he really needs against you are the BAC results since you're over the per se limit.

Can you get it reduced? The leeway on this varies by jurisdiction, but most prosecutors aren't offering reductions to non-alcohol offenses. They either want to the judge to rule the stop was invalid (in which case they just can't prosecute and case is cleared from their desk), or they're going to prosecute for an alcohol offense. The problem is that if prosecutors reduce an alcohol related offense, they're opening themselves up to harassment from MADD and other groups, negative media attention, etc... so most offices simply have a no reductions policy when it comes to DUI.

i revised my message

 

[CdwJava]

i was 100 percent cooporative and clearly not drunk but nervous.

As before, clearly the officer thought otherwise or you would not have been arrested.

Understand that one need not be "drunk" to be arrested for DUI, only impaired.

i took the field sobriety test and a breathalizer and blew a .11 bac.

And, with a BAC of .11 you WERE legally impaired.

i asked the officer why he pulled me over. he replied "your tires squeeked when you made the turn."

Okay. But, what does the report say?

And squealing of tires can be an offense for an exhibition of speed. But, I suspect there will be a little more to it than that.

the last part was he never read me my miranda rights. is there any way of getting this reduced?

Miranda is still not relevant for the same reasons previously posted.

Instead of revising your statement, perhaps if you can add to the discussion by replying so that we know what new stuff you might be adding rather than going back and trying to answer it again.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

As drunk as you were, your interpretation of events will likely not coincide those of the sober police officer.